Just fired 6 agm 65d at 2 bmpt and both survived and went on to win without being killed
TBH mate the best vehicle I’ve found against them is the Ra’am Sagol and M1 KVT xD not at all what I was expecting.
There aren’t many spots that a HEAT Maverick could hit to kill a BMPT
If you want to kill BMPTs specifically, the SAP-HE Mavericks do the job more reliably
Why on christs earth are you using thunderskill
So much ERA even the crew have it on them xD
Personal ERA
Modern day flak-vests
Feel free to provide better empirical evidence …
I think the consensus is that Statshark is better
Statshark is much newer so it doesn’t have the statistical weight of Thunderskill.
On Thunderskill you have for instance : Sherman Composito with almost identical K/D to an Obj.279 ( 2.14 vs 2.15 respectively ) while on Thunderskill there is much bigger gap in favor of the Obj.279 ( 3.5 vs 4.9 ) which makes sense since 279 is arguably more survivable.
Don’t get me wrong Statshark is nice but yeah you get the point.
But afaik Thunderskill only uses players that are actively registered on it so the sample size on Statshark is vastly bigger and much more representative
The problem with saying StatShark is ‘more representative’ just because it captures more data is that you ignore data quality.
The core issue here is the tension between historical depth and sample composition. While StatShark casts a wider net with the automated trackig, this approach inherently introduces statistical noise by capturing bot accounts, script-grinders, and inactive profiles that can heavily skew the mean.
Conversely, ThunderSkill’s strength lies in its longitudinal data, it has a much deeper historical record ( especially on some vehicles that are no longer available to new players outside of rare events ). Because it only tracks people who actually look themselves up, it creates a sample of ‘active’ players. It’s basically a leaderboard for the people who actually care about the game, rather than a giant list that incl every ghost account ever created.
TLDR : Yes Statshark has wider data sample but Thunderskill has far superior data quality. As shown in my previous comment Thunderskill stats make a lot more sense when it comes to vehicles. Now when it comes to engine perf graphs etc ( things that don’t require statistics ) yes Statshark is vastly superior .
Thunderskill is
- 1 hilariously out dated.
- 2 has a far smaller sample thus less accurate.
- 3 has always been far less accurate than statshark is now.
Read the comment above .
you are correct.
Thunderskill has my KD wrong as well as, the number of battles, and the efficiency I have lol. It’s still down at 60 odd percent which is just nonsense as most games now I am in the top 4 of my team.
I’ve read the comment above and it is mostly irrelevant, thunderskill was always massively misrepresentative of vehicles and statistics as it was only used by those who would sign in to it.
Which thus gives a substantially smaller, far more dedicated representation.
It mixes both air and ground battles into one which is ridiculous as it clogs up players stats as well.
Thunderskill was and still is absolutely filled with stat padders, which naturally makes tanks look better or worse.
It actively ignores helicopters, as well as lacks a lot of information on newer vehices which means again, it’s statistics are heavily skewed.
The playerbase you refer to which are opted in , is but a drop compared to the actual entire playerbase, actively playing.
Now we all know about “bot” accounts, but there are also tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of mediocre players, who have never heard of it and likely never will
So they will never see themselves on it.
Mines still has my stats from about 18 months ago as the most up to date as well, my overall KD is not 1.0 at all, my overall KD in GRB alone is verging 1.1, and ARB it’s higher.
It really doesn’t the sample size is tiny, and massively skewed by statpadders and sweatlords, like your mention of the 279, it’s rarely seen since it’s BR went up, bringing it’s KD down naturally.
However Thunderskill still shows it at a much higher rate as it still is using the KDs of it from many years ago when it was 8.3.
Thunderskill when it comes to actual vehicle statistics as well is quite off, you can look at the stats of a vehicle and it show you it massively over performing as I said due to statpadders abusing it so even if one is decent, it gets made to look stupidly stronger.
I mean it tracks barely 2% of the battles which go on, you cannot tell me that is a proper metric for any form of basis of how a vehicle performs statistically.
this for example, i havent touhed arcade in any game mode for many , many years. Not air nor ground.
What on earth are you talking about? Thats not how data collection works. Thunderskill has a vastly smaller data pool consisting entirely of actively registered players and therefore ignores all players that just dont care about registering which is the vast amount. Just compare the average differences in playrate. The T80UE1 has 10156 games in one month according to thunderskill, the same vehicle on statshark has over 2.6 million or thunderskill collected 0.0038% of the actual games. Thats way too low to give an actual statistically relevant result.
Pulling statements about balance from a tiny amount of the playerbase that actively has to register on a third party website is ridiculous
It also massively skewes the effectiveness of said vehicles, the obj 279 for example is finally balanced where it is and Statshark shows that, not that I agree with it all the time
Thunderskill still has the legacy stats of a near 5.0 KD
It pretty much skewes everything since the group of players registered on it will mostly be people taking the game extremely seriously. It might be nice if someone wants to know how some of the best players are doing in certain vehicles but with that mini amount of games tracked its borderline useless.
this whole tread is a whole a$$ ragebait at the end lol.